View Single Post
Old October 20, 2012, 10:28 PM   #12
F. Guffey
Senior Member
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 5,496
NWPilgrim, I have weighed cases for my benefit, and I heard all the deductive reasoning and rational about being thicker and because they? are thicker they are heavier. I had absolutely no interest in volume, I have about the same interest in volume as I do seating the bullet .002” off the lands, I am the fan of the running start, I want my bullets to have “THE JUMP”.

Instead of me, myself and I checking volume, first I weighed 250 cases then sorted by head stamps, after sorting I measured the case thickness, first, the case head, all my military cases with the exception of anything made by Wester my military case heads measured .200” +/- very little, so, before I take someone serious when they tell me there is no difference I have to insist there must be a difference in the length of the powder column then through deductive reasoning they must consider if the military case has less capacity the reduced capacity must be in the thickness of the case wall.

So I decided the powder column in my military cases was longer in length and smaller in diameter than in the R-P case. I measured the case head thickness of 100 R-P case heads, the thickness was .260”+, deductive reasoning caused me to decide the thick case head reduced the length of the powder column and if the length of the column was shorter but held more powder, I then concluded the R-P powder column for the 30/06 cases was shorter in length but larger in diameter than the powder column in my military cases.

Then I decided when shooting heavy loads the R-P case was a better choice because of the thicker case head, for the most part by .060” when compressing the case head the .060” takes more compression before catastrophic failure, for everything else, I do not mix case head stamps.

Then there is the 308W and the 30/06, the 308W is an impressive performer when compared with the 30/06, the powder column of the 308W is shorter in length and larger in diameter than the powder column of the 30/06.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Page generated in 0.04970 seconds with 7 queries